OldManThyme said:
Sky had a strict rule it seemed, on not hiring cycling doctors. Stricter than Garmin. Cycling doctors - your know, the doping enablers. But you are ignoring this? And dismissing it as irrelevant? Interesting.
Sky had a strict rule it seemed, on not hiring cycling doctors. Stricter than Garmin. Cycling doctors - your know, the doping enablers. But you are ignoring this? And dismissing it as irrelevant? Interesting.
ferryman said:
Makes you wonder why Millar can't be hired by them then, doesn't it?
It's really easy to be consistent. Tell the truth and you never have to remember what you said or explain why things are happening...
- Sep 15, 2010
- 1,086
- 3
- 9,985
"One consequence of a rewriting of cycling history will see Bradley Wiggins elevated on to the podium for the 2009 Tour, in which Armstrong finished third, so becoming the first Briton to make it there – three years ahead of his victory this summer."
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/others/lance-armstrong-in-ruins-as-he-is-to-be-stripped-of-tour-de-france-titles-8079505.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/others/lance-armstrong-in-ruins-as-he-is-to-be-stripped-of-tour-de-france-titles-8079505.html
the big ring said:
He part-owns Garmin, why would he join Sky? And he is very much part of GB's set-up, road-captain in the WCs and Olympics.
- May 21, 2010
- 808
- 0
- 0
- Jul 5, 2012
- 2,878
- 1
- 11,485
JimmyFingers said:
Ermmmm....didn't Wiggo and Cav have a major falling out about TeamGB selecting Millar?
On the Wiggo quotes on Lance, I find it hilarious these guys demand to see evidence if things discussed at length previously, and then carry on completely ignoring it when shown. Last we will hear about the Wiggo bromance for all things Lance from this lot lol.
Oh, BTW jimmy, ever heard of freedom of the press? Seems it doesn't work in reverse lol yup lets delete any reference to Wiggo (current Tour champion), nothing to see here, move on.
- Aug 21, 2012
- 90
- 0
- 0
the big ring said:
I had assumed you're earlier comment that Millar couldn't "get a gig" at Sky had value. But posts here say, as does Wiki, that he has part ownership of Garmin. Since 2008. So he was never going to ride with Sky anyway.
But...Yes, i read that Sky had a policy on only having doctors from outside of cycling. But since leinders has been with them since their first year of 2010, i'm sure that must have been re-written very early on!
I'm neither ignoring or dismissing the Leinders issue though. I have never stated i was not worried by it. Though i'm not particularly a Team Sky fan, i'm certainly not anti Sky. But i like to see logical conclusions and i'm not seeing enough here, given that we ought to look at the sport with a view to giving the benefit of the doubt unless proven otherwise.
So I'm questioning your apparent choice to dismiss/argue against the "Sky is clean" option so readily, as i get the feeling you're insinuating Sky have a doping program because Leinders is there?
Leinders, to my knowledge, is not a proven doping doc. From a risk management point of view, riders and management are the risks here. A team doc is just a tool. The management sits with ultimately responsibility and is the real enabler for assembling the "tools" and creating the environment and setting up the program for the riders. If a team management is clean, a team doc is never going to dope a rider. A team doc is only going to dope a rider if management is paying him to. If a rider goes AWOL to a doc like ferrari, then that doc is an enabler, yes. But the risk to the team is that ambitious rider that goes AWOL to that doctor. Not the doctor him/herself. So the risk objects are rider or an ambitious management intent on organised doping to cheat their way to greater success. Like lance (he was both risks in one). (Have heard the statements of some who say it's better to run inhouse doping as its safer for riders as then they don't feel pressure to run off and do it themselves.... bet that gets messy i'm sure. But a team doc is not going to act without management approval)
(Anyway, Leinders is a doc who was at rabo 5 years ago when there was one epo finding. Were there other docs on the team? Is he the doc responsible for that rider's epo result? Or did the rider (dekker?) go AWOL to a ferrari type? Or did he just self administer? Or was the national team involved? It would be rumour i assume that Leinders is a doping doc. Now he's obviously an experienced cycling doc so his legit skills are sought after. And sky was a new team forming before the outfall of teams going bust recently. So what were the options for a team doc available in 2009/10 when there was not the market we have had the last year or two? as Leinders was there for Sky's first year in 2010. So was he employed purely cos he was the doc with the best available ligit skills and experience at the time? Despite any concerns.
A doc is not a potential liability like a rider. As worrying as the rumours might make Leinders "shadow", the riders and management are the ones to be judged most.
The British public takes a very dim view of doping in sport. More so than neighbouring countries. The fans and general public don't idolise proven dopers in sport. Brits had a life time ban on Olympic dopers - before the rest of the world's stubbornness to change from a two year ban caused a fall into line with the 2 year rule. Team sky and British cycling wouldn't survive an organised doping scandal. Brailsford couldn't risk that even if he was the type to have a team doped. So i'm left inclined to scratch off the option of management organised doping when you consider the level of fallout possible with a British Cycling and Sky partnership fully exposing the entirety of top level cycling across all formats. Which just leaves the individual riders as risks. Which is another topic entirely. But your point was Leinders and the team as a whole. So there's nothing to argue...as i see it. But that just my opinion. I could be wrong.
But you seemed to have said that a team that turns away Millar, to ensure it looks clean, but then hires Leinders (what, to look dirty?) is doping and not to be given the benefit of the doubt we should be extending to all unless proven otherwise....that's a bit of a leap for me.
Which, yes, i find that interesting. I'm trying to keep an open mind and be optimistic despite worries of my own on not only rumours of Leinders but of the whole of cycling. I want to enjoy the sport....and think we should try to. Whilst not blinding ourselves to facts but without trying to pull down a new team just because it won a few races after pouring a tonne of cash at buying the very best it could and learning from it's first year or two, integrating a high work ethic and team focus and a training regime that riders have been quoted [Cav et al] as saying is far more organised and intensive then any other team they've experienced [even HTC]. And yet people are then surprised the riders do better than before?
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
I was busy with the Pharmstrong news, but i didn´t forgot you my friend.
So here is my reply:
Fully agree. Never said something otherwise.
Always suspect this Mr. Wiggins. Especially after his interview with (was it) Kimmage. Further, I don´t like his arrogant behaviour, that doesn´t make him look better in my eyes. He has a good chance to divide people like Pharmstrong did. And i am sure i´ll be on the "hater" side. So i think we don´t have to discuss this guy anymore. The most doubious performance jumps since Pharmstrong. That says it all for me...
It depends how you define relative dirtiness. It could be that Sky bends the rules as far as possible to stay inbounds. That means his "curve" can be explained as clean, cleanish or whatever you wanna call it. All i always said is, is that Froome is no more suspiciuos than any other active rider in the peloton.
You know i only brought this point up, b/c other guys came up with strange excuses for "their" riders (like Sastre and Evans).
Yep Evans had a story, as everybody. Lance had cancer, Lemond was shot, Bob Marley is dead. Blablabla.
Fact is, after being 14th, he was out of the picture for 3 years. And that in the best cycling age (26-28 years). And then in best Sastre manner he finishes on a GT podium for the first time after being 30. Something that never happened before the EPO-Era. Strange, isn´t it?
OTOH, Rogers between 03 & 10 was doing very ok (finishing 22, 10, 8 in GT´s w/o the help of team Sky). If he progresses like Evans, he should soon win a GT. Of course that would be super suspiciuos. I just wanted to show here how unreal Evans looks, compared to Sky riders outside of Wiggins.
I don´t know what you wanna say, i just mentioned the LIQ train, b/c it was exact the same as Sky: killing all racing b/c of Szmyd going super tempo every day in the Giro. The only difference was that Basso couldn´t deliver. No more, no less. Don´t forget Basso is very old now, while Froome is in best cycling age.
They also didn´t hang on in previous GT´s when the mountains got super high. OTOH, even Nocentini can hang on nowadays, even though the so called USPS-Sky-Train is marching. Funny, isn´t it?
Debunked. See above.
And i like that.
I said he could be dirty, but not as much as in the dark age (1990-2009). But he could also be clean, only that Sky bends the rules as far as possible to stay inbounds.
Or he could be a little bit dirty/cleanish (micro dosing, etc.). You know, like a little bit pregnant.
So here is my reply:
Franklin said:
Fully agree. Never said something otherwise.
Franklin said:
Always suspect this Mr. Wiggins. Especially after his interview with (was it) Kimmage. Further, I don´t like his arrogant behaviour, that doesn´t make him look better in my eyes. He has a good chance to divide people like Pharmstrong did. And i am sure i´ll be on the "hater" side. So i think we don´t have to discuss this guy anymore. The most doubious performance jumps since Pharmstrong. That says it all for me...
Franklin said:
It depends how you define relative dirtiness. It could be that Sky bends the rules as far as possible to stay inbounds. That means his "curve" can be explained as clean, cleanish or whatever you wanna call it. All i always said is, is that Froome is no more suspiciuos than any other active rider in the peloton.
Franklin said:
You know i only brought this point up, b/c other guys came up with strange excuses for "their" riders (like Sastre and Evans).
Franklin said:
Yep Evans had a story, as everybody. Lance had cancer, Lemond was shot, Bob Marley is dead. Blablabla.
Fact is, after being 14th, he was out of the picture for 3 years. And that in the best cycling age (26-28 years). And then in best Sastre manner he finishes on a GT podium for the first time after being 30. Something that never happened before the EPO-Era. Strange, isn´t it?
OTOH, Rogers between 03 & 10 was doing very ok (finishing 22, 10, 8 in GT´s w/o the help of team Sky). If he progresses like Evans, he should soon win a GT. Of course that would be super suspiciuos. I just wanted to show here how unreal Evans looks, compared to Sky riders outside of Wiggins.
Franklin said:
I don´t know what you wanna say, i just mentioned the LIQ train, b/c it was exact the same as Sky: killing all racing b/c of Szmyd going super tempo every day in the Giro. The only difference was that Basso couldn´t deliver. No more, no less. Don´t forget Basso is very old now, while Froome is in best cycling age.
Franklin said:
They also didn´t hang on in previous GT´s when the mountains got super high. OTOH, even Nocentini can hang on nowadays, even though the so called USPS-Sky-Train is marching. Funny, isn´t it?
Franklin said:
Debunked. See above.
Franklin said:
And i like that.
Franklin said:
I said he could be dirty, but not as much as in the dark age (1990-2009). But he could also be clean, only that Sky bends the rules as far as possible to stay inbounds.
Or he could be a little bit dirty/cleanish (micro dosing, etc.). You know, like a little bit pregnant.
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
Tyler'sTwin said:
Where is that interview? Oh man. What a w.anke.r
Hope he gets caught soon. Police raid at TdF next year, or in Italy. Whatever. It will be fine. I more and more dislike this c.un.t
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
- Aug 14, 2012
- 56
- 0
- 8,680
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
Well I wouldn't take those past results as a proof of being good clean rider. One should keep in mind the UCI's suspicious blood samples list from 2010 Tour de France that was leaked. Here's the Team Sky riders that were level 5 and above:
Konstantin Siutsou (Sivtsov) - level 8
Michael Rogers - level 7
Christian Knees - level 6
Geraint Thomas - level 6
Bradley Wiggins- level 5
So Wiggins then was a borderline case, but considering that Contadope was also level 5 and Pharmstrong level 4 (only!?), I'd say Wiggins was doping then too. And as for those other Sky riders, they were definitely dopers.
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
The Death Merchant said:
Ok, thanks. Forgot about the list...
OTOH, Knees wasn´t that much of a help, and Sivtsov was gone after what, 2 days?
I admit Rogers isn´t an angel. But is Evans??
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
Two. And during those lean years he did ride just one GT (a marvelous 60th spot in the Vuelta^^). However which way you slice it, Evans progression is a lot more gradual (especially if we add his MTB career). Neither Rogers or Froome have such a gradual progress.
Quite simply, the facts are squarely against you on this claim
No contention
Anyone looking at Cadels choices and how it culminates in a GT win knows enough. But the kindergarten defense is no defense.
First off, I think that Evans choice for BMC tells the real story, but still, the comparison with Rogers is quite ridiculous.
You fail to adress the enormous difference between Cadels many wins and Rogers lack of those during long stretches in his career. Evans simply was a much better rider at every stage of his career.
Depens on what you eman by that, there's more than just the fact that he worked for Rabobank, the manager who got fired, Theo de Rooy, came straight out and said that Leinder helped run the Rabobank doping program.OldManThyme said:
I actually agree with you here, i just draw a rather different conclusion. A team doc is just a tool, so why do you as a "clean" team management get the exact tool you need to run a doping program? For this reason I consider hiring a dirty doc more incriminating than hiring a dirty rider, though Team Sky certainly have riders with suspicious pasts as well.OldManThyme said:
OldManThyme said:
del Moral, Ferarri, Fuentes. All doctors. Not riders. Remove them and their ilk and things clean up REAL quick. Capiche?
OldManThyme said:
Clearly you are absolutely clueless on Leinders.
He was part of the management team: De Rooij, Breukink, Leinders.
This adressed 90% of your handwaving.
Oh plenty of evdence, undisputed.
1. Leinders got a "Carte Blanche" on medical issues to deliver a GT winner. Undisputed!
2. Jans Koerts mentions Leinders helped him keeps his crit low (and Leinders later admitted to epo)
3. The Dutch courts claimed the Rabo MGT team was fraudulent about Rasmussen's whereabouts. That MGT included mr. Leinders.
Circumstantial: During his years we had the infamous humanplasma case. As head doctor and part of the MGT (with his carte blanche) it's either criminaly incompetent if he didn't notice the shehanigans or (infinitely more likely) he was fully aware of them.
Your fairytale would work if he was just a lowly team doc. As I have pointed out Mr. Leinders role at Rabo is undisputed and is absolutely synonymous with fraude and doping.
There is absolutely no way a profesional team hires Leinders just for treating saddle sores. It's ridiculous considering his experience and reputation.
And yes, this knowledge is public domain (judical papers).
Awwww... fairytales again
Linford ffing Christie is just one of many examples of Brittish tolerance.
Want a more recent hero? Christine Ohuruogu.
Or another role model? Dwain Chambers.
Lewis Francis is a nice example of BOA morals.
And nobody forced the selection of David Millar at the Olympics.
OldManThyme said:
And someone who is guilty is going to say it, too.
So it's meaningless. And, because it's meaningless, it's not a real answer to why they've suddenly improved since winter 2010-2011 (i.e. since the hiring of Geert Leinders).
So, if we strip out those "explanations" - and the "we work hard" explanations, which are also meaningless - Sky's answer to the question, "Why are you riding so strongly?" is...
...silence.
- Jul 5, 2012
- 2,878
- 1
- 11,485
FoxxyBrown1111 said:...You know i only brought this point up, b/c other guys came up with strange excuses for "their" riders (like Sastre and Evans). Yep Evans had a story, as everybody. Lance had cancer, Lemond was shot, Bob Marley is dead. Blablabla.
Fact is, after being 14th, he was out of the picture for 3 years. And that in the best cycling age (26-28 years). And then in best Sastre manner he finishes on a GT podium for the first time after being 30. Something that never happened before the EPO-Era. Strange, isn´t it?...
Foxxy, you are now purposely being obtuse and disingenuous. There is nothing "strange" about 2002-2004 with Evans, you know full well he had a series of accidents and numerous broken collarbones that almost forced his premature retirement. His career trajectory is the most normal imaginable, your increasingly strident insinuations are doing you a disservice.
Evans was a dual Olympian starting in 1996 at 18yo, a dual world cup winner in MTB, he won the Tour of Tasmania at 19yo to demonstrate road ability.he wore the maglia in his first GT in 2002. He was at Telekom with Ullrich so did not get to compete the Tour as leader. He moved from Lotto to BMC for very sound reasons, money as a top GC and they were building a team to compete, something not at Lotto.
FFS all teams are besmirched, forgetting Bassons at Festina and Moncoutie at Cofidis? There is ZERO evidence circumstantial or otherwise linking Evans to doping, other than the ridiculous single visit to Ferrari before he started on the road in 2001 argument. He ditched Romonger as manager, and associates with Sassi not Ferrari.
Your arguments comparing him to Froome are ludicrous, and a disgrace to yuprself and the clinic.
Like with Lemond, if you can't find some actual evidence of any sort, then stop.
sittingbison said:
BMC is quite a team though and certainly not just besmirched. The choice for BMC is reason enough for a lot of questions.
- Aug 13, 2010
- 3,317
- 0
- 0
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 35K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram